Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

[Gerard]

Remember, Phalcon was originally designed for Cheen by Israel. The chinis had no platform available beyond the IL-76 so they made do with a transport aircraft that was ill-suited for the task of carrying a big radar on its back. With the A330 we can leverage a proper Western airliner aircraft that is far more efficient in the task like the 707 for the E-3 or the 737 for the Wedgetail.

While the Phalcon radar itself is Israeli, the platform is the Soviet A-50 aircraft (based on the IL-76) which has been in use for decades. The Russians operate about thirty A-50 aircraft (using the Vega radar).

[Philip]

The cost of a Phalcon platform is negligible, around $40M I think for the upgraded IL-76-MD. It is the high cost of the rotating radar and other sensors, associate consoles for operators , countermeasures, etc. mostly from Israel, that is the crux of the cost.

[John]

The cost of a Phalcon platform is negligible, around $40M I think for the upgraded IL-76-MD. It is the high cost of the rotating radar and other sensors, associate consoles for operators , countermeasures, etc. mostly from Israel, that is the crux of the cost.

This is incorrect the deal stalled because Russia jacked up the prices to point where A-330 became a viable option.

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ind ... 917651.cms

“Russia has majorly jacked up the prices for the IL-76s, which is unacceptable to the government”

[Philip]

The cost of around 40 for the RuAF was $4B.
Jordan was supposed to have bought a stretched variant for $50M.

Other heavy aircraft:
A C-17 is $150M, A-400 $100-120M, and an A-330 $250M.
Even if the price exceeds the $50M figure by a little, it's still 1/5th. the cost of an A-330! Only some mathematical gymnastics can prove that it is more cost-effective at 5 times costlier. The platform is or should be the cheapest
part of the system.The rest would be the main radar,arrays of other sensors, EW and other defence systems, and the consoles within for the airborne command centre.

The " jacked up price" in the 2017 report refers to the original 3 A-50 platforms which were the original IL-76 birds built in Uzbekistan along with the IL-78 tankers.The new upgraded IL-76MD-90 is far superior in performance, smaller crew, greater range and payload and built entirely in Russia not assembled in Uz. as it was during Soviet days.

It would clarify matters hugely if the break up costs are provided of that of the platform and the rest of the AWACS eqpt.

[gpurewal]

The cost of around 40 for the RuAF was $4B.
Jordan was supposed to have bought a stretched variant for $50M.

Other heavy aircraft:
A C-17 is $150M, A-400 $100-120M, and an A-330 $250M.
Even if the price exceeds the $50M figure by a little, it's still 1/5th. the cost of an A-330! Only some mathematical gymnastics can prove that it is more cost-effective at 5 times costlier. The platform is or should be the cheapest
part of the system.The rest would be the main radar,arrays of other sensors, EW and other defence systems, and the consoles within for the airborne command centre.

The " jacked up price" in the 2017 report refers to the original 3 A-50 platforms which were the original IL-76 birds built in Uzbekistan along with the IL-78 tankers.The new upgraded IL-76MD-90 is far superior in performance, smaller crew, greater range and payload and built entirely in Russia not assembled in Uz. as it was during Soviet days.

It would clarify matters hugely if the break up costs are provided of that of the platform and the rest of the AWACS eqpt.

The Russian planes may be cheaper to procure but, they cost the IAF a lot of $$$ afterwards when lack of spare parts are brought into question, reliability issues, and maintenance. At least with the other vendors (EU or Amerikanski), you know you are getting quality products, with a manufacturers guarantee that they work properly, and with solid supply/spares network to ensure maintenance can be performed properly. I believe that the costs associated with those planes are justified.

[John]

The cost of around 40 for the RuAF was $4B.
Jordan was supposed to have bought a stretched variant for $50M.

Other heavy aircraft:
A C-17 is $150M, A-400 $100-120M, and an A-330 $250M.
Even if the price exceeds the $50M figure by a little, it's still 1/5th. the cost of an A-330! Only some mathematical gymnastics can prove that it is more cost-effective at 5 times costlier. The platform is or should be the cheapest
part of the system.The rest would be the main radar,arrays of other sensors, EW and other defence systems, and the consoles within for the airborne command centre.

The " jacked up price" in the 2017 report refers to the original 3 A-50 platforms which were the original IL-76 birds built in Uzbekistan along with the IL-78 tankers.The new upgraded IL-76MD-90 is far superior in performance, smaller crew, greater range and payload and built entirely in Russia not assembled in Uz. as it was during Soviet days.

It would clarify matters hugely if the break up costs are provided of that of the platform and the rest of the AWACS eqpt.

Russians have not offered il-76md-90 for Phalcon we don’t how much work is required in certifying and modifying for that. To speculate is pointless. Still A-330 range is far superior to md-90 because of twin engine design.

[chetak]

twitter

Just learnt about passing away of my colleague during Kargil war, Admiral Sushil Kumar of Indian Navy. Always very professional and very positive. His contribution can not be forgotten. Will miss him. RIP Sushil

9:49 PM - 26 Nov 2019

[chola]

Remember, Phalcon was originally designed for Cheen by Israel. The chinis had no platform available beyond the IL-76 so they made do with a transport aircraft that was ill-suited for the task of carrying a big radar on its back. With the A330 we can leverage a proper Western airliner aircraft that is far more efficient in the task like the 707 for the E-3 or the 737 for the Wedgetail.

While the Phalcon radar itself is Israeli, the platform is the Soviet A-50 aircraft (based on the IL-76) which has been in use for decades. The Russians operate about thirty A-50 aircraft (using the Vega radar).

Yes, the A-50 would operate under same inefficiencies as the Phalcon. We are finding out about Phalcon's low endurance and air time after Balakot. If the Israelis, who upgrade and re-use russkie equipment from aircraft to tanks, can't fix it then it is inherent to the IL-76 to this role.

Our P8I's after the fourth year patrolled more miles than our IL-38s and Tupolevs in four decades. The efficiency advantage of western aircraft (and engines) to Russian ones is not a of few percentage points but of multiples. The 8 P8Is are used at more than 10 times the rate of our 13 Tu-124s and IL-38s were.

We will see the same kind of advantage with the A330 over the IL-76.

[rajsunder]

While the Phalcon radar itself is Israeli, the platform is the Soviet A-50 aircraft (based on the IL-76) which has been in use for decades. The Russians operate about thirty A-50 aircraft (using the Vega radar).

Yes, the A-50 would operate under same inefficiencies as the Phalcon. We are finding out about Phalcon's low endurance and air time after Balakot. If the Israelis, who upgrade and re-use russkie equipment from aircraft to tanks, can't fix it then it is inherent to the IL-76 to this role.

Our P8I's after the fourth year patrolled more miles than our IL-38s and Tupolevs in four decades. The efficiency advantage of western aircraft (and engines) to Russian ones is not a of few percentage points but of multiples. The 8 P8Is are used at more than 10 times the rate of our 13 Tu-124s and IL-38s were.

We will see the same kind of advantage with the A330 over the IL-76.

Since the IL-76 are from Ukraine, can we not put western engines on our IL-76 to improve its efficiency?

[chola]

^^^ I don't know. A new engine on the 737 for the MAX created series of unfortunate changes because of the shifting of the center of gravity that doomed the passengers and the plane. So these things, especially transport with external nacelles, are probably not plug and play in general.

[tsarkar]

https://twitter.com/indiannavy/status/1 ... 9306825729

Navy Day 2019 Video.

First glimpses of MiG-29K Buddy Refueling and Varunastra torpedo live fire in service. And Klub 3M-54E supersonic missile firing from Shivalik class.

Check out a 4000 tonne Talwar class in "normal seas" with the bow pitching out of water. Imagine that for nonstop 45 days and nights.

Cheers!

[tsarkar]

Folks a humble request to take the Il-76 and C-295 discussion elsewhere as IN has no interest in them whatsoever.

Transport aircraft like Il-76, An-32 and C-295 have high wings optimized for lift and payload but very poor fuel efficiency

Airliners and MPA like P-8, Il-38 and P-3 have low wings optimized for fuel efficiency and endurance.

Request moderators to clean up this thread including this post.

[tsarkar]

Photos of the Indo US Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief Exercises on the East Coast. Looking forward to the day we conduct disaster relief in Pakistan.

[Manish_P]

https://twitter.com/indiannavy/status/1201523039306825729
Navy Day 2019 Video.

Whooah. Super clip that. Go navy

[Vips]

Navy Chief Admiral Karambir singh flags concern over decline in funds allocation to Navy.

In the backdrop of China's aggressive naval expansion, Navy Chief Admiral Karambir Singh on Tuesday pitched for higher budgetary allocation for his force, flagging concerns over decline in the Navy's share in defence allocation from 18 per cent in 2012-13 to 13 per cent in 2019-20.

In a press conference on the eve of the Navy Day, the Navy Chief said the first indigenous aircraft carrier (IAC) will be fully operational by 2022 and it will have a fleet of MiG-29K aircraft.

According to plans, he said the second IAC will be 65,000 ton CATOBAR aircraft carrier with electric propulsion and that Navy will shortly approach the government seeking approval for the project.

[chola]

According to plans, he said the second IAC will be 65,000 ton CATOBAR aircraft carrier with electric propulsion and that Navy will shortly approach the government seeking approval for the project.

This has been going on for years though. Every fiscal quarter, the Navy goes to MOD for 65K ton carrier funding and is shot down. I hope we get the okay this time but I feel no confidence especially as budget allocation to the IN declines.

[Nikhil T]

In July, there was news that the IAC 2's cost of construction of the carrier itself, without the aircraft, would exceed Rs 70,000 crore. That price tag is not a surprise because CATOBAR + EMALS + Hybrid conventional fuel/electric propulsion are all sensitive US technologies that will cost us an arm and a leg to buy and much more to operate.

If I have one wish for 2020, I hope IN can wean itself off this lofty plan to build, what is essentially, an American aircraft carrier in India and instead, invest in more home grown subs and capital warships. Aircraft Carriers are for force projection and I don't feel we can project force from something that is so heavily dependent upon US technology, because it is so incredibly prone to sanctions, trade wars, and tech denial. It was less than 20 yrs ago that we were under American sanctions. Given that Aircraft Carriers take 15 or so years to manufacture - it is possible that we may be under sanctions at some point during INS Vishaal's construction!

Second, fundamentally Aircraft Carriers are much more suited for US, who has 2-3 conflicts around the world at any given time with relatively weak militaries like Afghanistan, Iraq, or Syria who can't threaten their Aircraft Carriers. In contrast, both Pak and China have significant airforces and navies that can make losing an Aircraft Carrier a very real prospect for India, if we choose to field it in a future conflict. Even in 1971, we were scrambling to defeat the lone PN submarine, which unsurprisingly, was hunting for our lone Aircraft Carrier.

Given our enemies are close, I'd rather provide IN a dedicated set of fighters that they can use for maritime ops from Andamans and Dwarka in Gujarat, fully supported by dedicated tankers and AWACS.

[Vivek K]

+1!!

No point in spending $10billion on an aircraft carrier! For our threats, we may not need the expense.

[Cain Marko]

+1!!

No point in spending $10billion on an aircraft carrier! For our threats, we may not need the expense.

Have to agree here. The best route is to have 3-4 carriers maximum based on the current Vikrant design. And loaded with ted.

[Manish_P]

If I have one wish for 2020, I hope IN can wean itself off this lofty plan to build, what is essentially, an American aircraft carrier in India and instead, invest in more home grown subs and capital warships...

+1

And also invest in developing tech for USVs. Short and medium range endurance. Small size to start with. For naval 'non-state' threats & port/shore monitoring & defense.

The IN, somewhat more than the IA and the IAF, seem to have better synergies with the research and development orgs. So am hopeful that we will see better (and faster progress) on this front. Budget allocation is a whole big issue though..

[Manish_P]

Manu Pubby on twitter

PLA Navy is moving at the pace they are capable of and we are moving at the place we are capable of - CNS on rapid expansion of the Chinese Navy.

Intriguing statement, if there is no typo..

[sum]

+1!!

No point in spending $10billion on an aircraft carrier! For our threats, we may not need the expense.

Have to agree here. The best route is to have 3-4 carriers maximum based on the current Vikrant design. And loaded with ted.

Absolutely 400% agree. We always seem to have this great urge to jump to the next shiny toy instead of standardizing on what we have in hand.
We have literally snail-paced the way through with the current Vikrant and learnt tons of lessons on the way, only to seem to throw it away with just 1 number and jump onto a insanely complex and expensive next version

I just pray this wont be a repeat of the AWACs fiasco where we are now belatedly realizing on how we should have gone ahead with certain numbers of AEW&C aircraft instead of stopping at 2-3 and then jumping onto the next big thing and finally being left with nothing in hand when realization dawns

[LakshmanPST]

As per IN, we only need two active Carriers at any given time with a 3rd one undergoing refit...
I always felt they should have gone for 2 Vikrant class carriers back to back... The second one to be ready 5-6 years after the first (around 2025-30)...
That would have given us enough time to properly plan, design, develop and build a bigger carrier by the time Vikramaditya is up for retirement sometime in late 2040s... And that experience could be used to develop 2 more carriers for Vikrant class replacement by 2070...
-
IN definitely need a 3rd carrier given their operational requirements... But, do they need a bigger carrier or is another Vikrant class carrier enough for now...???
That's something the govt. should decide...

[Prasad]

Unless goi commits to continue building large carriers, we'll end up with a russian (soviet), indian and an indian with substantial american input carriers. 3 different types for the next 50 years. Cannot imagine the operational costs involved.

[Cybaru]

Seen this one before?

[kit]

In July, there was news that the IAC 2's cost of construction of the carrier itself, without the aircraft, would exceed Rs 70,000 crore. That price tag is not a surprise because CATOBAR + EMALS + Hybrid conventional fuel/electric propulsion are all sensitive US technologies that will cost us an arm and a leg to buy and much more to operate.

If I have one wish for 2020, I hope IN can wean itself off this lofty plan to build, what is essentially, an American aircraft carrier in India and instead, invest in more home grown subs and capital warships. Aircraft Carriers are for force projection and I don't feel we can project force from something that is so heavily dependent upon US technology, because it is so incredibly prone to sanctions, trade wars, and tech denial. It was less than 20 yrs ago that we were under American sanctions. Given that Aircraft Carriers take 15 or so years to manufacture - it is possible that we may be under sanctions at some point during INS Vishaal's construction!

Second, fundamentally Aircraft Carriers are much more suited for US, who has 2-3 conflicts around the world at any given time with relatively weak militaries like Afghanistan, Iraq, or Syria who can't threaten their Aircraft Carriers. In contrast, both Pak and China have significant airforces and navies that can make losing an Aircraft Carrier a very real prospect for India, if we choose to field it in a future conflict. Even in 1971, we were scrambling to defeat the lone PN submarine, which unsurprisingly, was hunting for our lone Aircraft Carrier.

Given our enemies are close, I'd rather provide IN a dedicated set of fighters that they can use for maritime ops from Andamans and Dwarka in Gujarat, fully supported by dedicated tankers and AWACS.

Land-based ASW can only do so much, their persistence is much lower than an aircraft carrier group. The Indian Ocean is a very large ocean and it has to be kept in mind., it cannot be policed effectively by land-based assets alone.

India probably would need 5 carrier groups if sea control is the idea. , one group on each flank as well as one near to the African coast and another at eastern Andaman access region, one as the backup. But this armada would require 2 SSNs in each carrier fleet.

The only way to achieve this would be to ensure follow-on orders for both carriers and subs,

All these would remain on paper unless the economy improves and cash crunch eases.

[kit]

Manu Pubby on twitter

PLA Navy is moving at the pace they are capable of and we are moving at the place we are capable of - CNS on rapid expansion of the Chinese Navy.

Intriguing statement, if there is no typo..

why is it intriguing? IN should not go in for a d!@k measuring contest with the Chinese, not going to happen, their requirements are different and so is Indias, India should be concerned at their power projection abilities esp into IOR.The CNS seems ok with the pace of modernisation of IN.

[Katare]

Aircraft Carriers are non negotiable necessity for IN. USN has suffered through the teething pain of EMLS development, so IN would have relatively low pain route to it. EMLS or not it's time to graduate to the big boy's club, China is already building in that size range. We can't afford to let our only edge over Chinese navy wash away.

[Aarvee]

Manu Pubby on twitter



Intriguing statement, if there is no typo..

why is it intriguing? IN should not go in for a d!@k measuring contest with the Chinese, not going to happen, their requirements are different and so is Indias, India should be concerned at their power projection abilities esp into IOR.The CNS seems ok with the pace of modernisation of IN.

Sir, Our CNS said "place" not "pace" if I read it correctly?

[nachiket]

Aircraft Carriers are non negotiable necessity for IN. USN has suffered through the teething pain of EMLS development, so IN would have relatively low pain route to it. EMLS or not it's time to graduate to the big boy's club, China is already building in that size range. We can't afford to let our only edge over Chinese navy wash away.

These statements would be fine if we were a $10 trillion economy. IN aspirations have to be commensurate with what the country can afford. And it is up to them to utilize available resources optimally. So if there is a choice to be made between getting one 65000 tonne CATOBAR carrier vs several Destroyers/Submarines/ASW assets for the same cost which can more effectively counter the Chinese buildup then that discussion needs to be had and plans changed. Nothing is non-negotiable.

[SSridhar]

why is it intriguing? IN should not go in for a d!@k measuring contest with the Chinese, not going to happen, their requirements are different and so is Indias, India should be concerned at their power projection abilities esp into IOR.The CNS seems ok with the pace of modernisation of IN.

Sir, Our CNS said "place" not "pace" if I read it correctly?

To me it looks like it was a typo by the PTI Correspondent from whom many media sourced.

The Telegraph reports it correctly. URL. It says, "Asked about the massive expansion of the Chinese navy, he said they were moving at the pace they were capable of and “we are moving at the pace we are capable of”. The reporting was by its own correspondent.

When the Chinese 'pace' is referred to, naturally it must be India's 'pace' too.

[tsarkar]

Barak 8 firing. The launcher for target drone is in the helicopter deck.


The most up close and personal photo of the Kh-35E


The first bow shot of INS Vikramaditya with all deck parking, fighter launch and helicopter spots occupied.


The beauty of this shot is INS Viraat sailing ahead.

[srai]

^^^
The last image of MiG-29 looks bit weird. Look at the the wheels and the deck. It looks as though MiG is flying. Can’t make out is it landing or take-off.

[chola]

Aircraft Carriers are non negotiable necessity for IN. USN has suffered through the teething pain of EMLS development, so IN would have relatively low pain route to it. EMLS or not it's time to graduate to the big boy's club, China is already building in that size range. We can't afford to let our only edge over Chinese navy wash away.

These statements would be fine if we were a $10 trillion economy. IN aspirations have to be commensurate with what the country can afford. And it is up to them to utilize available resources optimally. So if there is a choice to be made between getting one 65000 tonne CATOBAR carrier vs several Destroyers/Submarines/ASW assets for the same cost which can more effectively counter the Chinese buildup then that discussion needs to be had and plans changed. Nothing is non-negotiable.

The Navy has never been spendthrift with the budget. It had always been given the smallest portion of the budget and it is the most indigenized of all the services giving the nation an even bigger bang for the buck.

So if the IN is asking for a 65K ton carrier then there has to be a reason. The IN had asked repeatedly for this third carrier and were rejected. If it were not important then why would these admirals, these proud men, go hat-in-hand to the MoD and get rejected again and again? Why not just settle for more submarines and destroyers?

There is a reason and that reason is they know best why a third, large CATOBAR carrier is important. It can't be replaced by subs and even other capital ships if we are to field a first tier navy.

[tsarkar]

^^^
The last image of MiG-29 looks bit weird. Look at the the wheels and the deck. It looks as though MiG is flying. Can’t make out is it landing or take-off.

Taking off from the long takeoff position with the nosewheel aligned to yellow centerline and right MLG aligned to tyre marks of previous takeoffs. The wheels are on the deck.

[Aditya_V]

Was the KH-35E missile launched from INS Vikramaditya or some other ship?

[tsarkar]

Was the KH-35E missile launched from INS Vikramaditya or some other ship?

Kora class

[Manish_P]

The Telegraph reports it correctly. URL. It says, "Asked about the massive expansion of the Chinese navy, he said they were moving at the pace they were capable of and “we are moving at the pace we are capable of”. The reporting was by its own correspondent.

When the Chinese 'pace' is referred to, naturally it must be India's 'pace' too.

Thanks. I thought it must be a typo.

If however he intended to say 'place', i wondered if the CNS accepting that our industry/economy/bureaucracy can't match the chinese currently, was stating matter-of-factly that the other way (excluding alliances like the Quad) was to focus even more on having our assets distributed more optimally at the important geographical points. And thence fully knowing the geography & geo-politics (for eg choke points) to priortise the budgeting/development/procurement of assets needed for those points before other products.

[lakshmanM]

^^^
The last image of MiG-29 looks bit weird. Look at the the wheels and the deck. It looks as though MiG is flying. Can’t make out is it landing or take-off.

Taking off from the long takeoff position with the nosewheel aligned to yellow centerline and right MLG aligned to tyre marks of previous takeoffs. The wheels are on the deck.

It looks photoshopped

[Bala Vignesh]

It looks photoshopped

It most definitely is not, sir.